On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 10:18:05AM -0700, jasonps...@jegas.com wrote: > I'm curious if it is a bad deviation from the recommended installable > fonts to only install DejaGnu Fonts and FreeFonts. > > I don't really have a need for Chinese, Korean or Japanese fonts really > nor do I like Microsoft's mandates on how you can and can't use their > fonts. > > If there are applications that will be thwarted without them, I'll grab > them. > If you folks think I should grab them anyway - I will also. > > What do you think? > > --Jason
dejavu, not dejagnu :) Supposedly, (a few years ago now) bitstream-vera had better hinting than dejavu, so I build both. No idea if the hinting still differs. If you don't wish to read other writing-systems, and are happy to see inverse-question-marks in place of those glyphs, you should be ok. +1 for avoiding MS font restrictions. If you ever find that some glyphs look "undernourished", they're coming from freefont. If this ever happens a lot, and you aren't reading a *very* uncommon language, you might wish to try other fonts : I think I first used Charis-SIL because it supports phonetic symbols (common in reading about languages in wikipedia!). Cantarell-fonts (which will be added to the fonts page when I put gnome-3 in the book) are good for tiny sizes, and seem to have good coverage. Ubuntu-fonts seem to provide good coverage too (noticeable in abiword, which is still unable to use fontconfig to get a glyph from another font). Meanwhile, for the moment go ahead with only those two - it's easy enough to add others later when you find a reason to try them. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
